About your Search

20121101
20121130
Search Results 0 to 4 of about 5 (some duplicates have been removed)
-- perhaps israel -- would face. they've already tested their missiles to show what a retaliatory strike on tel aviv would be. these drills also have the intended consequence of raising the price a little bit. the iranians are saying, okay, it's going to cost more if you bomb us, therefore, if we come to the negotiating table, we want more. and this all has to be looked at in the prism, if you will, of u.s./israel relations after the elections here. the prime minister here in israel, prime minister netanyahu, and president obama have a very icy relationship. the prime minister all but endorsed governor romney in the past election, and there's been a lot of fear here that now a second term president obama will take a much tougher line against israel when it comes to iran, when it comes to the palestinians. there has been some vocal, hostile, very negative reaction here by israeli politicians to president obama's re-election, and there's a lot of anger at the prime minister for making israel and the united states' support of israel a partisan issue, a political issue during the presidentia
a nuclear weapon? the problem is it leaves israel out of the equation. even though the united states and iran and the obama administration might come to that kind of a deal. forget about the consequences that deal might have, israel isn't going to necessarily like that deal. and if israel perceives it's been isolated and it's on its own they may do something, preemptive strike against iran. while israel can start that war. it can't finish it. and that's why iran did what it did. it wanted to show the united states that whatever happens between israel and iran, don't realize -- don't forget the fact that the united states will be drawn into it, too. i think it was a warning shot from iran. shannon: the white house denied there are secret talks involving valley jarrod. they say it's absolutely not happening. this isn't the first time we heard a report along these lines. what is your sense? >> my sense is we probably are -- maybe not directly negotiating with iran. but there have been suggestions the united states and iran are looking into some kind of diplomacy. one of the first things
in the u.n. human rights council which has been very anti-israel. and her defense is, look, we do it because it would have been even worse if america hadn't been there to defend israel as this israel bashing went on. >> part of the problem with that statement is that it's indefensible. she made that statement two weeks after the human rights council finished a session in which it passed more israel-bashing resolutions than it had at any session before. so if her presence is doing any good -- or our presence is doing any good, it's not perceptible. megyn: what about syria? we've lost our focus on it in the recent weeks and months with the election, but they are involved in a civil war now, and it was said that bashar assad was about to go. well, he hasn't gone, and, you know, thousands upon thousands of children are dying in syria, many being tortured in front of tear families, and the -- in front of their families, and the unite isn't doing that much. we tried to do something at the united nations, it failed. >> it failed in large measure because the chinese and russians -- with w
Search Results 0 to 4 of about 5 (some duplicates have been removed)